Production rule proposal.

The place to shoot the breeze on all things IHMSA
User avatar United States of America
JACKIE40X40
Class A
Posts: 505
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 11:12 am
IHMSA Member#: 13263
Location: Moore Oklahoma

Production rule proposal.

Post by JACKIE40X40 »

New Production Rule Proposal
Submitted by JIM FIELDS - Region IV Director 405-203-1268 - Date - 02-08-17
This proposal in no way is asking for a new category, we have enough as it is. As most of us board members know, we have lost numerous shooters in our sport over the years to declining eyesight, especially in the production categories, both production & revolver. If it wasn't for IHMSA approving scoped guns in the mid-90's & I think most of you will agree, IHMSA would no doubt be a thing of the past.
Let me insert something here, as Oklahoma State Director in the mid-80's in Idaho Falls, ID, I had a proposal on the table two if not three different years to create a scope category for those who wanted to compete with a scoped handgun, notice I said wanted to use a scope, in other words those who didn't want to, that was their option. That same thing applies to this new proposal.
My thinking at that time was for the same reason I'm proposing this rule change, & that being older shooters with eye-sight problems. And as anyone who might of been in attendance at one of those meetings in Idaho, I got laughed out of place including the Oklahoma shooters that drove up with me. I explained at that time as shooters age became a factor they would drop out of our sport as a result of their eyesight going south.
IHMSA membership had a huge decline in the late 80's & early to mid-90's as most of you know, & this was the point I tried to get across years earlier. If that proposal had been approved in the mid 80's I truly believe there would not have been as big of a loss in membership.
Don't know the exact year, but I think it was 1996 we voted to include a scope class on a trial basis for a couple of years & the rest is history, the UAS category in both BB as well as SB is now by far our most popular categories.
At my club here, OKC Gun Club, we're lucky to have 3 to 5 entries in production & about the same for the revolver category & that's unacceptable, most all will agree they can't see the iron sights anymore. I think that holds true at most IHMSA clubs across the country as well as Canada, Australia & Brazil.
So here is my PROPOSAL, to allow reflex sights (red-dot) on both production & revolver handguns in our sport. No new categories involved; now, the board is to determine one of two things (1) to allow reflex sights for shooters of any age or (2) set an age limit say at 60 years of age or whatever, that to be determined by majority of the board. My research shows that most all of these sights are under 4 ounces, so to make weight add 4 ounces to total production gun weight.
Now, some my argue that blade & post shooters will be at a disadvantage, I don't agree, you still have to do the mechanics & keep the dot on distant targets thru the whole firing sequence. If you get beat by a shooter using this reflex sight, so be it. Most reflex sights have little to no magnification.
Some may be skeptical of this proposal but rest assured it will undoubtedly add entries to our local matches & therefore put more money in the bank account of IHMSA & local clubs as well & I think you all will agree we need the extra revenue as recent financial records have reflected. And remember this, you younger shooters, your time will come believe me, & this new rule will extend your time competing in this great sport of silhouette competition.
There is no doubt in my mind that if we adopt this new rule change & the word gets out IHMSA will experience some of our older shooters who have dropped out returning to our sport.
Most other handgun sports across the world have adopted these sights, so there is no reason IHMSA, can't join the party & possibly save IHMSA from extinction.
After much discussion on this new rule change & thinking of the future of IHMSA, I would hope the board as a whole would approve this proposal or at least put it on a 2 year trial basis starting with the 2018 season.
UPDATE: This proposal has been approved by the IHMSA board of directors at the OKC Gun Club on July 17th, 2017 & will go into effect on January 1st, 2018 on a two (2) year trial basis. Age limit is set at the IHMSA senior level which is 60 years of age, a weight increase of 4 ounces has been added on production guns including revolvers.
United States of America
260 Striker
Class AA
Posts: 1623
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 7:41 pm
IHMSA Member#: 0
Location: DeGraff, OH

Re: Production rule proposal.

Post by 260 Striker »

TEST, TEST. I posted a reply twice to his thread and didn't take so will try a test now.
Lynn Shultz
IHMSA #15692 since 1980
Past Match Director Logan Handgun Association
Current VP Logan Handgun Association
NRA Member
United States Air Force Veteran
Retired USAF Civil Servant (47 years)
937-407-4885
United States of America
braud357
Class A
Posts: 652
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2011 7:56 am
IHMSA Member#: 13794
Location: Gonzales, LA

Re: Production rule proposal.

Post by braud357 »

Jackie, I appreciate you posting this. While I can see your point, I personally cannot support this. The main reason for my non-support is that the age provision is - frankly put - discriminatory. While I know of many shooters (myself included) who may benefit from this, you are failing to acknowledge the fact that poor vision can afflict any age. I also know that there are some shooters over the age of 60 that have maintained their good vision. I will admit that I have had very little experience with reflex sights, but it is much easier to hold a dot or crosshair reticle on a target that it is to align a front post and rear notch. Another problem for me is that we already have provided categories for those shooters who are visually challenged - that being the very scope classes that Mr. Fields championed in the past. Thinking that this will bring back shooters is, at best - wishful thinking. If these shooters would have wanted to continue shooting, they would be shooting the scope classes ! My final point is this - I appreciate that it was passed as a 2-year trial, because there are a lot of shooters who are dead-set against this. Something like this should have been offered with a discussion period beforehand. I personally will not try this, because I am not going to invest more money towards silhouette equipment. My nearest Big-Bore match is 226 miles away. And, I have sold all of my Production guns - and I will venture a guess that most of the shooters that you are hoping to return have sold theirs also. This is my personal opinion - and I respect those who may disagree with my statements. This rule addresses a problem that has already been solved by the scope classes ! Philip Braud IHMSA#13794 Louisiana State Director
IHMSA # 13794 Joined May, 1980
Match Director Ascension Silhouette Gonzales, LA 1991-2009
Louisiana IHMSA Deputy State Director 1983 - 1985
Louisiana IHMSA State Director 1995 - 2007, 2014 -
IHMSA Region 2 Director 2007 - 2009
Life Member - NRA
United States of America
260 Striker
Class AA
Posts: 1623
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 7:41 pm
IHMSA Member#: 0
Location: DeGraff, OH

Re: Production rule proposal.

Post by 260 Striker »

I recently put an optic sight (NOT a dot sight) on a Taurus M44 revolver and will try it in PH. This gun is not Production legal since it is ported but IS PH legal. If people would like to put optics on Production legal guns then PH is the way to go. Also there is no weight limit in PH so don't need to worry about a few extra ounces to make weight. The term "reflex" is also misleading to me since many dot type non-magnifying sights are not "reflex" type sights. Would those tube type dot sights be outlawed during this trial period? Also, I don't think MDs will be happy checking shooters drivers licenses to verify they are 60 or older. Many of the dot sights also lack repeatable adjustments and the dots cover quite a bit of the targets especially when shooting small bore. How many shooters are now using dot or "reflex" sights in PAS? Not many. I applaud the idea of trying to keep the older shooters active but we have the current PH category that would allow them to shoot with dot/reflex sights on production guns. I'm 71 and had to switch to UAS many years ago. Later I had cataract surgery and can see iron sights again so I am better off than most seniors. I plan to shoot PH just for the novelty of it plus I can use the banned Taurus 44 in PH.
Lynn Shultz
IHMSA #15692 since 1980
Past Match Director Logan Handgun Association
Current VP Logan Handgun Association
NRA Member
United States Air Force Veteran
Retired USAF Civil Servant (47 years)
937-407-4885
United States of America
jmoore
Class B
Posts: 387
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 3:09 am
IHMSA Member#: 57653

Re: Production rule proposal.

Post by jmoore »

I don't think I would mind particularly. I've found red dots to add very little, score-wise FP vs. FPAS. Often I get better scores using the regular old open sights. May be somewhat more beneficial in the freestyle categories. Possibly counterproductive, score-wise in BB, depending on the round used. Mostly because elevation adjustments don't seem all that reliable in most RDs. But if you can do "Kentucky elevation" with the dot it's not so bad.

(BTW, hoping my new glasses help reduce the astigmatism in my shooting eye! Lately, 1 MOA dots have looked like about 5 MOA lines at about 30 degree inclination...)
;)
United States of America
braud357
Class A
Posts: 652
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2011 7:56 am
IHMSA Member#: 13794
Location: Gonzales, LA

Re: Production rule proposal.

Post by braud357 »

Just throwing this out there - how about instituting PAS and RAS (Production Any-Sight, Revolver Any-Sight) categories ? That way, no problems with rule interpretation , age restrictions, optic verification, etc. Must be a gun that would qualify for Production or Revolver otherwise. This way, (conceivably) - no one is left out ! Comments ?
IHMSA # 13794 Joined May, 1980
Match Director Ascension Silhouette Gonzales, LA 1991-2009
Louisiana IHMSA Deputy State Director 1983 - 1985
Louisiana IHMSA State Director 1995 - 2007, 2014 -
IHMSA Region 2 Director 2007 - 2009
Life Member - NRA
User avatar United States of America
19 Turkeys
Class AA
Posts: 1092
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2011 12:14 am
IHMSA Member#: 33287
Location: S Arizona
Contact:

Re: Production rule proposal.

Post by 19 Turkeys »

braud357 wrote:Just throwing this out there - how about instituting PAS and RAS (Production Any-Sight, Revolver Any-Sight) categories ? That way, no problems with rule interpretation , age restrictions, optic verification, etc. Must be a gun that would qualify for Production or Revolver otherwise. This way, (conceivably) - no one is left out ! Comments ?
Sure like it better than the current proposal!

Steve W.
Past Match Director, JCSA - Grants Pass, OR
Past JCSA Board Member
IHMSA Life Member
Past Editor IHMSA News
Past Manager of IHMSA HQ West
NRA Patron

Due to recent cutbacks the light at the end of the tunnel has been turned off.
United States of America
Richard Pickering
Class B
Posts: 304
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2011 10:56 am
IHMSA Member#: 5905
Location: Stone Mountain, Ga

Re: Production rule proposal.

Post by Richard Pickering »

Isn't the P H category just a catch all for non standard (doesn't meet Production Rule) guns ? Let it remain that way. Previously I stated my preference that P H be a ''non-Competition'' event. Shoot whatever you have for your enjoyment and let it go at that. I campaign a 10'' Production TC 7-tcu and another that is scoped. I can elect to use the scoped barrel as UAS or as PH. If you have a scoped Revolver you could elect the same. Bring it; shoot it. Repeat as necessary. rp
I have served as assistant match director, Southern Silhouette club, 1980s. Also, the Griffin Gun Club for Silhouette during the 1990s, to about 2005. For a short period I authored the ''Cast Bullet'' section of The IHMSA News. Joined IHMSA March 1979.
United States of America
260 Striker
Class AA
Posts: 1623
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 7:41 pm
IHMSA Member#: 0
Location: DeGraff, OH

Re: Production rule proposal.

Post by 260 Striker »

I'm confused (which is easy to do). Are we trying to make a new category/classes for people who only like to shoot Production type guns or trying to create a category/classes to aid people with eye conditions? I think Philip is onto the right track. If a person wants to shoot a scoped/dot sight but otherwise Production legal gun but not compete in UAS then we need a new category/class called ASP (Any sight Production). The gun could be single shot or revolvers but otherwise pure Production. Now if a shooter wants to shoot a scoped/dot sight but otherwise Production legal gun standing but not against US shooters then we could have a new category/class ASS (No pun intended) Any Sight Standing. Might be a lot of shooters in the ASS class!!!! Anyway my point is, are we trying to find more uses for current Production guns or helping shooters with eye issues? In some respects I can appreciate a shooter who does not want to spend a lot of money on a more expensive gun to compete in UAS or US and prefers to use a Production type handgun. Those shooters are currently forced to compete in UAS or US against the longer barreled unlimited type guns. Might also be easier to just have shooters put (S) or a circled S on their current score card to indicate the use of a scope. Still would not work with the existing match report software so we are back to making a new category and classes. I still think all these new entries could be handled in our current PH categories.
Lynn Shultz
IHMSA #15692 since 1980
Past Match Director Logan Handgun Association
Current VP Logan Handgun Association
NRA Member
United States Air Force Veteran
Retired USAF Civil Servant (47 years)
937-407-4885
United States of America
braud357
Class A
Posts: 652
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2011 7:56 am
IHMSA Member#: 13794
Location: Gonzales, LA

Re: Production rule proposal.

Post by braud357 »

Please understand - I am not advocating any new categories. I am merely trying to illustrate the problems with the reflex sight trial. Anyone that thinks that a reflex sight is no more effective than a post-notch sight is mistaken. Expecting a shooter to compete heads-up with a 60+ y/o shooter with good eyesight and a reflex sight is unrealistic. My opinion has not changed - the scope categories and Practical Hunter should accommodate every shooter who is visually "impaired" - with a more level playing field and no discrimination. Shooters wanting (or needing) a optic to compete can pursue the scope classes or PH. These classes were created especially for them ! Listen to the uproar that will result whenever a reflex shooter wins a championship over an open-sight competitor ! He will think that he has been cheated ! (yes, I know - he should be a better sport about it !) if this happens too often you will lose that open-sight shooter !! My opinion - we have done PLENTY to accommodate those with visual problems - no need to do more ! Last comments on this - I promise !



]
IHMSA # 13794 Joined May, 1980
Match Director Ascension Silhouette Gonzales, LA 1991-2009
Louisiana IHMSA Deputy State Director 1983 - 1985
Louisiana IHMSA State Director 1995 - 2007, 2014 -
IHMSA Region 2 Director 2007 - 2009
Life Member - NRA
Post Reply